Posted on 08/02/2009 6:07:38 AM PDT by Billg64
There is not much question about Gate's attitude regarding race. I doubt that Officer Crowley considered Gate's race when confronting him.
The question remains, does one have the right to act badly in their home and on their property, without fear of arrest? Does an anonymous 911 call allow police to violate the fourth amendment of the Constitution? Since when does speaking rudely to a police officer constitute a crime?
I heard judge Napalitona asking and answering these questions yesterday. His guest was the sheriff from Arizona, he agreed that the arrest was illegal.
What are your thoughts?
see post 20
The cop invited him outside his own testimony states that.
40 years ago, I was in a tavern when a drunk and despondent man came in after his wife left him. He was throwing glasses around the room and crying. The police were called; two uniforms talked the man down and took him outside. They cuffed him and knelt him on the ground to search. their supervisor arrived and was talking to them. The man on the ground resumed ranting and crying, the supervisor looked up, ran full speed towards him and kicked him square in the softest part. The uniforms picked him up and drove off. The next night he was back, no memory, no arrest record, no permanent damage. Much better.
Obamagates gate. Hold Your Own beer summit. Stock up on Colt 45’s.
how about you test your theory, and let us know how it works out.
The report was a 911 call. I don’t know where you live, but here they’re not so anonymous.
I have, I will not comply with an unlawful order by anyone. I have been told at a rally that I could not speak to people in cars stopped at lights, I could not cross the road at a legal crosswalk. I violated the un-lawful orders and was threatened with arrest for dis-orderly person, did not happen, had I been arrested with all the witnesses I had, I would have prevailed in a court.
“The report was a second person anonymous call. The police officer did not have reasonable cause to enter the home.”
Gates’ ID was IN THE HOME. Of course he had the right to follow him in. Until he provided evidence it was his house, a CRIME WAS IN PROGRESS.
So some guy is breaking into your house, your neighbor calls 911. The police arrive and ask the guy about what was going on and he says, “Oh, this is my house”. When asked for proof the guy says “It’s inside, let me go get it”.
Guy goes inside, cop waits. And waits. And waits. By the time he realizes the guy isn’t coming back, burglar has made off with some of your property out the back door and is gone.
Are you going to be soooo happy that the police didn’t violate the burglars rights or are you going to be mad that they let someone in your house without knowing it was his house and didn’t follow him to be sure?
Perhaps you should first go take your meds, then go listen to the tapes of the event and read up on the complete backstory.
This did not take place in a home belonging to Gates. When the officer ran the ID(over Gates’ screaming and yelling) it didn’t come up as his house
It took place in a home belonging to Harvard (which benefit Gates was dodging the taxes on by the way). Your post makes many similar false assumptions.
The whole incident took less than 8 minutes.
Hardly some great harassment.
second person, the caller stated that someone (anonymous) told her hey saw someone breaking into the home. So as teh cops got the info it was not reliable info. If second person info becomes justification for going into a person’s home, we are all screwed every time we piss someone off
It was a 9-11 call and the caller answered every question the dispatcher asked and was at the location but outside the property (having listened to the tape that was released). That is hardly “anonymous”
If this criteria was used, every call to 9-11 would be anonmymous and no cop would enter any property where a possible crime was reported, without a warrant
What if Gates goes back into his house, pulls a handgun out of the drawer near the front door and begins firing at the assembled crowd.
How does Crowley defend his actions then?
Is it really a good idea for the police to encounter an person in an agitated state who appears for all the world to be unbalanced, and then just leave him to do as he pleases?
First, show me how the Fourth Amendment was violated.
Ya know that is the truth
Hate speech is indictable.
what if what if
what if a frog had an anvil on his ass, he would be a blacksmith.
A person can not be detained for a what if
Gates was hostile all the way. The insults on the cops mother were the last straw. I guess my prejudice is for the Irish Cop. I am for free speech and free actions but something else went on. The whole thing has been overblown and I guess I am not helping any.
So you give up your constitutional rights when you live in a rented home or home donated you by another entity?
If someone is running around the subway screaming about radio-waves sent to scramble his brain, nothing can or should be done until he actually pushes someone onto the tracks, huh?
Thank God society isn't ruled by folks with your intellect.
agreed Gates is not an upstanding individual. But a cop is supposed to be the protector of our constitutional rights. If the sh** hits the fan like it may soon in this country; I would prefer the cops defend our constitutional rights rather than enforce illegal laws.. ie hate speech, disorderly conduct while on one’s own place of residence, disturbing the peace etc.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.